Iceland wasn't really a slave colony. Yes there were slaves there, but not anywhere near the scale of antiquity or African slaves sent to the Americas in the early modern era.

Poor people settled Iceland out of desperation, a few rich people went with them as land owners and government leaders just like 500 years later with the Americas. Rich people in the Viking era usually had slaves, some of whom could have been Irish.

I'm really trying to see where your going with the Irish slave thing, Blue. Most cultures (possibly all) around the world had slavery. Christianity and Islam changed all that with the exception of the African trade (both Muslim trade and trade to the Americas). Why? Who knows? Money and greed sound like the good standard answer to why both the Christians and the Muslims did it so long post antiquity in Africa and not anywhere else.

If you want to focus on English oppression of the Irish, economics is a good place to start.

What point are you assuming aye am making? You didn't seem to have a point regarding the information aye provided at all...my icelandic question was simply catechetical. So, aye shall respond with the same obfuscation. Aye'm sure you learned something from the vast information you gathered before you placed your post...so good for you...didn't know there were Irish slaves in America? Now you do...maybe you already knew...but aye bet there are some who didn't know this.

And sorry to be a cynic but Iceland was a slave colony... it wasn't just that some rich Vikings had some slaves. Similarly, Haiti was a slave colony...it wasn't just that some rich in the French empire had some slaves...Sorry to be cynical in telling you that there is no scale capable of measuring the value of a human....500 slaves...5000 slaves or 50,000 slaves...irrelevant....what is relevant are the affects and effects of pillaging and uprooting another culture.

There is good research regarding the genetics of Icelandic people and there origins...check it out...there is more to it than you may think.

Iceland wasn't really a slave colony. Yes there were slaves there, but not anywhere near the scale of antiquity or African slaves sent to the Americas in the early modern era.

Poor people settled Iceland out of desperation, a few rich people went with them as land owners and government leaders just like 500 years later with the Americas. Rich people in the Viking era usually had slaves, some of whom could have been Irish.

I'm really trying to see where your going with the Irish slave thing, Blue. Most cultures (possibly all) around the world had slavery. Christianity and Islam changed all that with the exception of the African trade (both Muslim trade and trade to the Americas). Why? Who knows? Money and greed sound like the good standard answer to why both the Christians and the Muslims did it so long post antiquity in Africa and not anywhere else.

If you want to focus on English oppression of the Irish, economics is a good place to start.

Blue is the OP. Probably trying to argue more diversity in slavery, historically. He's right there is. But the African slavery is more relevant because it ended so recently that there are still socioeconomic effects from American slavery we all deal with every day.

Irish, like St. Patrick were a slaves, but it was far enough in the past that there are no current effects (what do you think the social basis for anti black racism is- they were slave class not that long ago). Blue is trying to nullify modern consequences of slavery occurring less than 150 yrs ago in our world, with slavery that occurred 500 years ago is a world of the past.

While such a position has historical truth, the modern relevance is far less apparent.